I'd imagine that they are only going by Autosomal DNA tests, and that they have probably broken things down to results that are assigned to Hunter Gatherer, Neolithic Farmer and Bronze Age arrivals. Like I mentioned before, it appears that Welsh and Cornish may show higher Caucasus scores that others in Britain or Ireland, and that may be assigned to Neolithic arrivals.

I wouldn't imagine that they are using Y-DNA to make this assertion at all.

" Our map is based on about 600,000 genetic markers across the whole genome, excluding the mtDNA and Y-DNA for the time being. mtDNA and Y-DNA will only show the history of those particular bits of the genome, whereas our analysis looks at the whole genome. We do have data on both mtDNA and Y-DNA that we plan to look at as well and compare to our current analysis but we haven't managed to do this yet."

I'd imagine that they are only going by Autosomal DNA tests, and that they have probably broken things down to results that are assigned to Hunter Gatherer, Neolithic Farmer and Bronze Age arrivals. Like I mentioned before, it appears that Welsh and Cornish may show higher Caucasus scores that others in Britain or Ireland, and that may be assigned to Neolithic arrivals.

I wouldn't imagine that they are using Y-DNA to make this assertion at all.

" Our map is based on about 600,000 genetic markers across the whole genome, excluding the mtDNA and Y-DNA for the time being. mtDNA and Y-DNA will only show the history of those particular bits of the genome, whereas our analysis looks at the whole genome. We do have data on both mtDNA and Y-DNA that we plan to look at as well and compare to our current analysis but we haven't managed to do this yet."

Yes, when you test the genome you get Y-DNA and mtDNA results, however when you run an Autosomal population test, you compare the results of the whole genome tested. The person's mtDNA or Y-DNA are only a small part of that.

You may be unfamiliar with Eurogenes or Dodecad tests. If you were aware of these test results, you would understand what I'm taking about. If you go to these Projects Population comparison results, you will see that they don't show a testers Y or mtDNA results.

It would surprise me. I have never believed R1b of any kind has been in Western Europe since before the last Ice Age, and I still don't. That would put it too far from home, too soon, and with far less diversity than it should have, if it were that old.

I think the "Ice Age R1b" thing is an artifact of a number of errors. Probably foremost among them was the old idea, which goes back at least to the 19th century, that the Basques are some sort of Paleolithic remnant population. Due to that idea, scientists were predisposed to see any y haplogroup predominant among the Basques as the paramount European aboriginal y haplogroup. It happened to be R1b, so - voila! - there you have it: we're all the descendants of Cro Magnon Man.

There is also a history of peopling, or of wanting to people, the "Celtic Fringe" with a more primitive, more barbaric, and less enlightened form of humanity. That made the political domination of the area more palatable. I'm not saying that is the modern motive, but it certainly informed the opinions of the past, and those opinions became fossilized and have been inherited intact.

Then you have the fact that certain European flora and fauna apparently did move out of the F-C Refuge after the LGM. The natural inclination, upon seeing that, would be to conclude that the majority y- haplogroup in western Europe must have been among them.

Certainly some elements of the idea are probably true. Perhaps elements of a Paleolithic or Mesolithic heritage are traceable in west European autosomal dna and perhaps even in its mtDNA.

But I strongly doubt that any kind of R1b stems from that long ago in western Europe. Paleolithic y-dna in western Europe probably either no longer exists or exists only in vestiges here and there. Or it may be best represented by its downstream descendants in y haplogroup I.

These two sets of data were prepared by Leo Little and are complementary. The first present the gene diversity for 7 Hgs and 67 dys loci. The second presents the same data but as allele distributions.

Its not necessary to get complex here, diversity is a fairly self-explanatory word and in our case usually represents a wider distribution of allele values for higher diversity.

If you look at table I and the first 12 dys loci, you do not find a strong pattern, high and low diversity Hgs. vary from locus to locus. I believe it is hard to argue from this data that R1b has the lowest diversity of the 7 Hgs. For many dys loci, E and G are lower.

There does appear to be some correlation of diversity with modal value in that higher modals appear to have higher diversity, but it is not fully consistent.

My point is that it is not clear to me that R1b is the least diverse of these hgs?

I wouldn't imagine that they are using Y-DNA to make this assertion at all.

No, it's an autosomal project so far. Eventually they will get around to looking at the Y-DNA, maybe the mtDNA too. They still have the 4,000-odd (blood) samples. But it's funded by the Wellcome Trust, which is more interested in medical research than in genealogy or the Peopling of Anyplace. Medically interesting information may be found on the other chromosomes, and may be inherited from any male or female ancestor; so they don't just look at alpha and omega, skipping the rest of the ancestral alphabet, so to speak. If you look at the map at the link just posted by sernam:

and then read the following post from another forum (that was a little less hot-headed about the fact that the People of the British Isles Project was so titled), perhaps less will be left to the imagination.

I'd imagine that they are only going by Autosomal DNA tests, and that they have probably broken things down to results that are assigned to Hunter Gatherer, Neolithic Farmer and Bronze Age arrivals. Like I mentioned before, it appears that Welsh and Cornish may show higher Caucasus scores that others in Britain or Ireland, and that may be assigned to Neolithic arrivals.

I wouldn't imagine that they are using Y-DNA to make this assertion at all.

" Our map is based on about 600,000 genetic markers across the whole genome, excluding the mtDNA and Y-DNA for the time being. mtDNA and Y-DNA will only show the history of those particular bits of the genome, whereas our analysis looks at the whole genome. We do have data on both mtDNA and Y-DNA that we plan to look at as well and compare to our current analysis but we haven't managed to do this yet."

Yes, when you test the genome you get Y-DNA and mtDNA results, however when you run an Autosomal population test, you compare the results of the whole genome tested. The person's mtDNA or Y-DNA are only a small part of that.

You may be unfamiliar with Eurogenes or Dodecad tests. If you were aware of these test results, you would understand what I'm taking about. If you go to these Projects Population comparison results, you will see that they don't show a testers Y or mtDNA results.

Ok but I thought I was agreeing w you. It says they aren’t using Y or mt, although I originally thought they were including it along w the rest until I saw that quote above.

I'd imagine that they are only going by Autosomal DNA tests, and that they have probably broken things down to results that are assigned to Hunter Gatherer, Neolithic Farmer and Bronze Age arrivals. Like I mentioned before, it appears that Welsh and Cornish may show higher Caucasus scores that others in Britain or Ireland, and that may be assigned to Neolithic arrivals.

I wouldn't imagine that they are using Y-DNA to make this assertion at all.

" Our map is based on about 600,000 genetic markers across the whole genome, excluding the mtDNA and Y-DNA for the time being. mtDNA and Y-DNA will only show the history of those particular bits of the genome, whereas our analysis looks at the whole genome. We do have data on both mtDNA and Y-DNA that we plan to look at as well and compare to our current analysis but we haven't managed to do this yet."

Yes, when you test the genome you get Y-DNA and mtDNA results, however when you run an Autosomal population test, you compare the results of the whole genome tested. The person's mtDNA or Y-DNA are only a small part of that.

You may be unfamiliar with Eurogenes or Dodecad tests. If you were aware of these test results, you would understand what I'm taking about. If you go to these Projects Population comparison results, you will see that they don't show a testers Y or mtDNA results.

Ok but I thought I was agreeing w you. It says they aren’t using Y or mt, although I originally thought they were including it along w the rest until I saw that quote above.

I thought I was responding to Bren and that he was using that to show that they were using Y and mtDNA for the Welsh assertion. Sorry :)

I have said many times that the mtDNA is more useful to demonstrate migrations. I have found on SMGF, but probably they are known also elsewhere, some haplotypes of K1e (but the Isles, like Central North Europe till Poland, has also many K1d: more than 20 on SMGF) which are linked to that of Ötzi, K1f, and likely came from the Italian Refugium, where the haplotype of Ötzi remained:

The only truth in the hunter theory is that R1b on the whole does look like it took to farming late. However, EVERYTHING points to the place where these late hunters living being in the east somewhere.

The only truth in the hunter theory is that R1b on the whole does look like it took to farming late. However, EVERYTHING points to the place where these late hunters living being in the east somewhere.

I don't think anyone is talking about connecting R1b to Hunter Gatherers. Actually, I don't think R1b or any Y-DNA Haplogroup is involved is the age assertion of Wales. It's all from Autosomal testing as far as I and others know.

I think Gioiello was just being facetious and having some fun, since the idea of "invasions out of the East" is one of his pet peeves, and he knows full well that my haplotype isn't all that far off the WAMH. I am a typical DF13+, apparently like most men of British and Irish ancestry.

It would be nice if we knew what aspect of Welsh dna this study is talking about.

Besides, most of my matches come from the West Midlands and not Wales.

If I'm not mistaken, the Greek explorers (can't remember which) stated the longest settled inhabitants were found inland in the center of the island. I would guess the Peak District would perhaps be a viable regional candidate. It makes sense to me because newer inhabitants from either end or both ends of the island could be a factor why the longer settled people are always found in the chewy creamy center. Displacement by replacement always works to move people around--I suppose.

I think Gioiello was just being facetious and having some fun, since the idea of "invasions out of the East" is one of his pet peeves, and he knows full well that my haplotype isn't all that far off the WAMH. I am a typical DF13+, apparently like most men of British and Irish ancestry.

It would be nice if we knew what aspect of Welsh dna this study is talking about.

Besides, most of my matches come from the West Midlands and not Wales.

When the Industrial Revolution took place & railways were making travel easier, many folk in rural locations headed for the nearest big city to find more lucrative employment.Rich, I know of many Brummies (Birmingham folk) who were via Welsh stock. Ironically, many of the same families are more affluent now & are moving away from the cities back to more rural locations west of Birmingham! In my birth county it's reckoned that approx one tenth of its inhabitants were found to have moved to London by the 1890s.Cheers,Bob

Rich, how many letters have you written in these years? Perhaps 20,000? But probably within one hundred years you will be remembered only for having invited me to write to this forums! Lol….

I know this a thread on the Welsh, but I think have some Welsh in me so that makes this on topic.

I am also glad that Rich invited Gioiello to join and I'm glad that Gioiello accepted. Let us not forget that disagreement is not about conflict, but about the germination, development and refinement of ideas ... learning.

. Like I mentioned before, it appears that Welsh and Cornish may show higher Caucasus scores that others in Britain or Ireland,

That's interesting do you have a link or details for this?

If you go to the Dodecad or Eurogenes Projects and look for the results on their runs you should see it. Sometimes on earlier runs in is listed as West Asian. The Eurogenes runs have a lot of Cornish results. Also, many of the results from the Netherlands show high Caucasus scores.

Unfortunately he doesn't break out the Welsh, i don't think Dienekes does either.

Sometimes they get results from studies, and they don't seem to have any from a Welsh study. There are some private UK testers from Wales though, but it hard to find the list of participants and they aren't always up to date or complete.

There are some private UK testers from Wales though, but it hard to find the list of participants and they aren't always up to date or complete.

Doesn't Brian P. Swann have a Welsh project? On the Facebook ISOGG page (and I think elsewhere) he has discussed the POBI map that was displayed at the Royal Society. He visited it July 3, and took a closeup of the Wales part of the large map. I can't find it, now. That's a little off-topic, but I just mean he's into the Welsh DNA, and very current.

The only truth in the hunter theory is that R1b on the whole does look like it took to farming late. However, EVERYTHING points to the place where these late hunters living being in the east somewhere.

I don't think anyone is talking about connecting R1b to Hunter Gatherers. Actually, I don't think R1b or any Y-DNA Haplogroup is involved is the age assertion of Wales. It's all from Autosomal testing as far as I and others know.

Its an interesting area but its doesnt seem that there is a lot of agreement on what the major components in autosomal clusters are. I tend to think of the North Sea Baltic cluster as Mesolithic but I dont know much about it except from Dienekes comments. It would maye perfect sense if there is an area of high Mesolithic input all along the north Atlantic, North Sea and Baltic Sea coastal fringes because these were areas where farming arrived late.

There are some private UK testers from Wales though, but it hard to find the list of participants and they aren't always up to date or complete.

Doesn't Brian P. Swann have a Welsh project? On the Facebook ISOGG page (and I think elsewhere) he has discussed the POBI map that was displayed at the Royal Society. He visited it July 3, and took a closeup of the Wales part of the large map. I can't find it, now. That's a little off-topic, but I just mean he's into the Welsh DNA, and very current.

Janet Crain and I run a Wales Cymru DNA project through FTDNA. We are in touch with Brian, but it is not his project! The Romans spoke of the different "tribes" in the area now called Wales. If remnants of these people still live there, they certainly could be among the most ancient in the UK.

So for ancestry which test is the most accurate; Autosomal,Y-DNA or mtDNA?

It depends on what you are looking for. If you only wish to know the ancestry of your father's, father's father's, etc. line than a good, deep clade Y-DNA test ins in order. It won't tell you anything about otherlines in your DNA, though.

If you wish to know the ancestry of you mother's, mother's, mother's, etc. line, then a good mtDNA test is in order. It won't rell you anything about your other lines, though.

If you wish to know were your total DNA profile matches up with other testers and their areas of population, then a good Autosomal test is in order. If you test with 23andMe, you will also be given your Y-DNA and mtDNA designation without markers. You will also received medical information.

Once you have your Autosomal data, you can upload it to Gedmatch and run it through several Population Test that will divide your DNA into ancestral populations.

The most common problem I see on these forums, is that posters seem to identify their Y-DNA with their whole ancestry.

Accuracy is not really a good word to describe testing. If you know your direct male line is from Wales, and you are a male, test your Y-DNA. Notice that you already have to know your ancestor was from Wales. The test won't tell. You that he was from Wales. Same with mtDNA, for direct maternal, but of coure males amd females can take this test. It is not used as much for genealogy as it is for deep ancestry. Autosomal can only tell you what's there - meaning you could have a Native American ancestor, but the DNA markers you inherited may not indicate it. You would have to have researched many, many ancestors, and then find other people who match your DNA segments and share the same ancestor to "prove" an ancestor.

So for ancestry which test is the most accurate; Autosomal,Y-DNA or mtDNA?

It depends on what you are looking for. If you only wish to know the ancestry of your father's, father's father's, etc. line than a good, deep clade Y-DNA test ins in order. It won't tell you anything about otherlines in your DNA, though.

If you wish to know the ancestry of you mother's, mother's, mother's, etc. line, then a good mtDNA test is in order. It won't rell you anything about your other lines, though.

If you wish to know were your total DNA profile matches up with other testers and their areas of population, then a good Autosomal test is in order. If you test with 23andMe, you will also be given your Y-DNA and mtDNA designation without markers. You will also received medical information.

Once you have your Autosomal data, you can upload it to Gedmatch and run it through several Population Test that will divide your DNA into ancestral populations.

The most common problem I see on these forums, is that posters seem to identify their Y-DNA with their whole ancestry.

I agree that is a silly approach. I mean even going back to about 1800 many will hit the 128 lines of the ggggg grandparents generation. Everyones y line is therefore less than 1% of their ancestry of 200 years ago. Two more generations back into perhaps 1750 or so everyone has 508 lines and the Y of that time is only 0.2% of all your lineages of that generation. It gets crazy once you get back to c. 1700 and you have about 2000 lines. By 1600 and early European settlers of America its 16000 lines and your y from c. 1600AD is a ridicolously small portion of your ancestry. Certainly I dont think anyone should get too puffed up about a y-ancestor of say 1600! I laugh when some people have some sort of ancestor (perhaps a posh one with a portrait in a castle) from 100s of years ago and try to see a resemblance with them even though their DNA is maybe 0.2% the same as the guy with the wig in the painting. Daft!